Just another LOCK issue that I'm about to add to the list...
A resource can only have one exclusive lock on it right?
Well, what about if a principle locks (with depth) two trees of resources... but
those two trees have some resources in common? That means those common
resources would have two exclusive locks on them. Illegal, right? But the same
principle owns both locks mind you. It would sure be nice to allow this... at
least from this perspective. If we did not, it would sure be tedious to lock
both trees.
I haven't thought of the ramifications yet.
J.
------------------------------------------
Phone: 914-784-7569, ccjason@us.ibm.com